Jump to content

christian forums

Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Forums

Welcome to Worthy Christian Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

creation of the universe?

- - - - -

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
47 replies to this topic

#1
alphaparticle

alphaparticle

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,236 posts

Does the Genesis creation account talk about the creation of the entire universe or only the earth? I have assumed it was referring to the creation of the entire universe but it's been brought to my attention that may not be the right way to understand it. What do you think?

 

gen 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

 

Do heavens here mean the skies/atmosphere of the earth?

 

Here's another example:

 

gen 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years,
 
Could this refer to the appearance of stars, sun and moon on the surface of the earth rather than their creation at that time?
 
I could see this understanding working in these passages, but it's not clear to me that's the obvious way to understand them.


#2
OldSchool2

OldSchool2

    Senior Member

  • Worthy Writers
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts

 

Does the Genesis creation account talk about the creation of the entire universe or only the earth?  ...

 

Then are we talking about a relatively young Earth?



#3
bopeep1909

bopeep1909

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,042 posts

Genesis 1:1.God created the heavens and the earth.That would be the universe.Why does man seek to eliminate God from having had any role in creation of the universe?.Man hates God and does not want to be subject to God's law,or held accountable for his actions.

Romans 1



#4
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,008 posts

Genesis 1:1.God created the heavens and the earth.That would be the universe.Why does man seek to eliminate God from having had any role in creation of the universe?.Man hates God and does not want to be subject to God's law,or held accountable for his actions.

Romans 1

No, that is not what is being proposed.   What is proposed is that the age of the universe may be independent from the age of the earth.  God may have made the universe ahead of the earth/solar system.    This would allow for a young earth, but also for the fact that we have starlight that is millions and millions years old.   What if God created the universe ahead of the earth.  God created the universe to house the earth, and then created the earth to house us.

 

Genesis 1 is, in context about the creation of the earth, not the creation of the universe.   One thing to understand is that Bible speaks in phenomenological language.  In other words it is written from the perspective of an observer describing what He sees.  Genesis 1 is like that.  It is written from the vantage point of an observer who is standing on the earth and watching what is happening around him.  The stars first become visible on the fourth day and the earth's creation was synchronized with the rest of the universe so that starlight from stars millions of light years away would arrive at the earth on day four of the creation week.

 

This hypothesis, and it is just a hypothesis, allows for a young earth but for the starlight to be much older.  The problelm for creationists is that we have quantifiable evidence of stars billions of light years from earth who light we only now see by aid of Hubble. The closest star after our sun is 4.5 billion  light years from earth and so it is problematic for creationists to say it was created at the same time the earth was created because we know how fast light travels and if stars we can see are billions of light years from earth and we could not see their light after only six to ten thousand years, so a possibility is that these stars were created before the earth, and then visible to the observer on the fourth day.



#5
bopeep1909

bopeep1909

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,042 posts

 

Genesis 1:1.God created the heavens and the earth.That would be the universe.Why does man seek to eliminate God from having had any role in creation of the universe?.Man hates God and does not want to be subject to God's law,or held accountable for his actions.

Romans 1

No, that is not what is being proposed.   What is proposed is that the age of the universe may be independent from the age of the earth.  God may have made the universe ahead of the earth/solar system.    This would allow for a young earth, but also for the fact that we have starlight that is millions and millions years old.   What if God created the universe ahead of the earth.  God created the universe to house the earth, and then created the earth to house us.

 

Genesis 1 is, in context about the creation of the earth, not the creation of the universe.   One thing to understand is that Bible speaks in phenomenological language.  In other words it is written from the perspective of an observer describing what He sees.  Genesis 1 is like that.  It is written from the vantage point of an observer who is standing on the earth and watching what is happening around him.  The stars first become visible on the fourth day and the earth's creation was synchronized with the rest of the universe so that starlight from stars millions of light years away would arrive at the earth on day four of the creation week.

 

This hypothesis, and it is just a hypothesis, allows for a young earth but for the starlight to be much older.  The problelm for creationists is that we have quantifiable evidence of stars billions of light years from earth who light we only now see by aid of Hubble. The closest star after our sun is 4.5 billion  light years from earth and so it is problematic for creationists to say it was created at the same time the earth was created because we know how fast light travels and if stars we can see are billions of light years from earth and we could not see their light after only six to ten thousand years, so a possibility is that these stars were created before the earth, and then visible to the observer on the fourth day.

 

Please tell me what difference it makes.



#6
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,008 posts

Please tell me what difference it makes.

 

If it is true, it may show us how much science and the Bible do agree and that God didn't create a universe that disagrees with what the Bible says about it.



#7
alphaparticle

alphaparticle

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,236 posts

 

 

Does the Genesis creation account talk about the creation of the entire universe or only the earth?  ...

 

Then are we talking about a relatively young Earth?

 

Could be. As Shiloh pointed out if we take the creation account in Genesis to be talking about the creation of the earth, the universe could be old and the earth young.



#8
PrairWarur

PrairWarur

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

I think it means the creation of the entire universe.  What is not clear is the time frame.  I say this because I think it could be literally a day/24 hours, or as later Scripture indicated, "a day to the Lord is as 1,000 years."  I do believe this means that time is not necessarily a factor with God, as He is infinite and eternal, no beginning and no end, but it could also mean a day is as 1,000 years to Him.  So, with each day of creation, I suppose it could be 1,000 years as easily as it could be one day.

 

I better stop here as I am not making a lot of sense!  *LOL*

 

I think you get what I mean, though, Alpha!  If anyone here at Worthy understands my scattered mind, it would be you!  You've had a little more experience in trying to understand me.  Are you there yet?   :hmmm:

 

Peace to you,

PriarWarur



#9
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,008 posts

One thing to keep in mind is that scientists were claiming the earth to be millions and millions of years old as far back as the the late 1700s and the early 1800s (the age of reason) and this was long before radiometric dating and carbon 14 dating.  I am currently of the opinion that the data is filtered through an assumption that was made long before there was any science to back it up.  It is an assumption that came before the research and what we have is data that is being interpreted to fit the assumption when it should be the other way around.

 

I fear that when it comes to origins science, we have created a field of research that was designed to support what scientists want to believe.  Scientists are people with passionately held beliefs just like anyone else. It would be nice to think that scientists are completely rational, disinterested automotons, about the origin of life and the unvierse, but they are not. 

 

Darwinian evolution came about at a time when we knew relatively nothing about the complexity of a single cell.  The more we learn, the futher back evolutionists have had to push the age of the earth in order to account for the complexity and the time needed for it.  Had the theory of evolution been offered today AFTER everything we know about the complexity of the cell and DNA, I don't think it would have ever gotten off the ground.



#10
bopeep1909

bopeep1909

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,042 posts

 

Please tell me what difference it makes.

 

If it is true, it may show us how much science and the Bible do agree and that God didn't create a universe that disagrees with what the Bible says about it.

 

Compared to God and our salvation I do not think it matters.



#11
alphaparticle

alphaparticle

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,236 posts

 

 

Please tell me what difference it makes.

 

If it is true, it may show us how much science and the Bible do agree and that God didn't create a universe that disagrees with what the Bible says about it.

 

Compared to God and our salvation I do not think it matters.

 

I find it kind of odd to contribute to a discussion by saying you are not interested in it. I started the thread because it's a topic that interests me and I think it matters insofar as it's a biblical matter and ought to be taken seriously.



#12
shiloh357

shiloh357

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,008 posts

 

 

Please tell me what difference it makes.

 

If it is true, it may show us how much science and the Bible do agree and that God didn't create a universe that disagrees with what the Bible says about it.

 

Compared to God and our salvation I do not think it matters.

 

But it does matter.  Genesis 1 is foundational for understanding Jesus as our Creator, Savior and Judge



#13
alphaparticle

alphaparticle

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,236 posts

I think it means the creation of the entire universe.  What is not clear is the time frame.  I say this because I think it could be literally a day/24 hours, or as later Scripture indicated, "a day to the Lord is as 1,000 years."  I do believe this means that time is not necessarily a factor with God, as He is infinite and eternal, no beginning and no end, but it could also mean a day is as 1,000 years to Him.  So, with each day of creation, I suppose it could be 1,000 years as easily as it could be one day.

 

I better stop here as I am not making a lot of sense!  *LOL*

 

I think you get what I mean, though, Alpha!  If anyone here at Worthy understands my scattered mind, it would be you!  You've had a little more experience in trying to understand me.  Are you there yet?   :hmmm:

 

Peace to you,

PriarWarur

Yeah, so days not meaning 24 hrs is a separate issue from what I'm asking here, but I am familiar with that notion also.



#14
OldSchool2

OldSchool2

    Senior Member

  • Worthy Writers
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts

 

 

 

Please tell me what difference it makes.

 

If it is true, it may show us how much science and the Bible do agree and that God didn't create a universe that disagrees with what the Bible says about it.

 

Compared to God and our salvation I do not think it matters.

 

But it does matter.  Genesis 1 is foundational for understanding Jesus as our Creator, Savior and Judge

 

 

I think Genesis 1 is only foundational for our understanding of Jesus in light of John 1, the "genesis" of his gospel.



#15
other one

other one

    Royal Member

  • Royal Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,476 posts

One thing to keep in mind is that scientists were claiming the earth to be millions and millions of years old as far back as the the late 1700s and the early 1800s (the age of reason) and this was long before radiometric dating and carbon 14 dating.  I am currently of the opinion that the data is filtered through an assumption that was made long before there was any science to back it up.  It is an assumption that came before the research and what we have is data that is being interpreted to fit the assumption when it should be the other way around.

 

I fear that when it comes to origins science, we have created a field of research that was designed to support what scientists want to believe.  Scientists are people with passionately held beliefs just like anyone else. It would be nice to think that scientists are completely rational, disinterested automotons, about the origin of life and the unvierse, but they are not. 

 

Darwinian evolution came about at a time when we knew relatively nothing about the complexity of a single cell.  The more we learn, the futher back evolutionists have had to push the age of the earth in order to account for the complexity and the time needed for it.  Had the theory of evolution been offered today AFTER everything we know about the complexity of the cell and DNA, I don't think it would have ever gotten off the ground.

 

and when they do find things that disagree with that it is quietly discarded...

 

 

I agree that it's important.....   I've met a lot of scientific minded people who say they simply can't accept the gospel for what they see in nature just doesn't line up with the Bible.    i hadn't really thought  about what you put in this post Shiloh, but it makes perfect sense now that I see it.



#16
hmbld

hmbld

    Advanced Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 258 posts

What is the approximate age of the earth, something like 4500 to 6000 years old?  With the science channel promoting 4.5 billion years as fact?  I've always thought since God choose to create Adam as a man not a baby, why would it be hard for Him to create earth with 4.5 billion years of "age" at day one? Including stars of all ages so the light would be arriving at day one also?



#17
PrairWarur

PrairWarur

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

This topic does matter very much to some.  It is also an important way to evangelize and cause people to think.  

 

I agree with Enoch in that assumptions are made and they could be wrong.   It occurs to me, also, that facts were altered in some cases to support the theory instead of the theory being fully supported by factual evidence.  It seemed to me that where facts were unavailable then giant leaps were made in an attempt to prove something not in existence.  An example of what I am saying is that as I read various articles written on evolution the terms "Let us suppose that ..." and other assumptions are used frequently.  This always bothered me.  If we are to take evolution as fact, then assumptions have no place here.  IMHO

 

I have also read that carbon dating is not precise and has been found to be wrong in many cases.  This concerns me, too.  One example of this is found in a book called, "Dinosaurs and The Bible."  I don't have the author right now, but I do own the book.  Until then, a google search may give the author.

 

I home schooled my children and somewhere around this house I have some excellent Science books that are Christian and I will locate them one day and share the information given.  I will at least be able to share the book titles and authors and let you make your own assumptions from that.  *LOL*  Just had to use the word assumption again.

 

I have always stated there are so many holes in the evolution theory that it made it difficult for me to believe.   I think it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in creation.  

 

One example is this - let us think of things happening randomly opposed to intelligence being involved.  Random vs. Intelligence -  I would choose intelligence being the catalyst.  Of coarse, this is for those who do not believe in God, or that a Creator was involved, because Creator God could have used evolution as the process in creation.  God being in the equation is the only way I could possibly believe in evolution.  Another topic for another thread would be Intelligent Design, which I think should be taught in schools.

 

The other question I have that was never satisfactorily answered is where did the gases come from that started the Big Bang?  Professors never did agree, and some stated that Cosmology was "junk science," yet Cosmology is what they referred to when attempting to explain.  So I, and my questions, were dismissed, which never did settle well with me.  I want the answers and they could not fully deliver.

 

I can barely make any attempt to discuss this topic as I am completely ignorant to these issues.  The more I try to share, the more my ignorance will show.  So, if I drop out of the conversation, it will only be because you have all gone way over my small head.   :help:  Still, I am glad to read and learn.

 

Looking forward to learning more and I will gladly follow this topic.  I apologize for deviating from the original OP, but these things were on my mind and I decided to leave them here and you can do with them what you choose.  At this time in my early stages of being an active reader and contributor to the forums, I have a lot of difficulty finding some of the topics that I have read, but I have opted to follow these topics so that in the future I may find them more easily.

 

Peace to you all!

 

In His Service,

PrairWarur



#18
PrairWarur

PrairWarur

    Veteran Member

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

 Back to the original question, yes, I think the universe was created before, or along with everything else as described in Genesis.  Reading the text describes the sun, moon and stars all being created, so I think everything was created at that time and at the same time, however long it took, be that seven actual days, or seven thousand, or even seven million years.

 

Peace to you!

 

Respectfully,

PrairWarur



#19
alphaparticle

alphaparticle

    Senior Member

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,236 posts

This topic does matter very much to some.  It is also an important way to evangelize and cause people to think.  

 

I agree with Enoch in that assumptions are made and they could be wrong.   It occurs to me, also, that facts were altered in some cases to support the theory instead of the theory being fully supported by factual evidence.  It seemed to me that where facts were unavailable then giant leaps were made in an attempt to prove something not in existence.  An example of what I am saying is that as I read various articles written on evolution the terms "Let us suppose that ..." and other assumptions are used frequently.  This always bothered me.  If we are to take evolution as fact, then assumptions have no place here.  IMHO

 

I have also read that carbon dating is not precise and has been found to be wrong in many cases.  This concerns me, too.  One example of this is found in a book called, "Dinosaurs and The Bible."  I don't have the author right now, but I do own the book.  Until then, a google search may give the author.

 

I home schooled my children and somewhere around this house I have some excellent Science books that are Christian and I will locate them one day and share the information given.  I will at least be able to share the book titles and authors and let you make your own assumptions from that.  *LOL*  Just had to use the word assumption again.

 

I have always stated there are so many holes in the evolution theory that it made it difficult for me to believe.   I think it takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in creation.  

 

One example is this - let us think of things happening randomly opposed to intelligence being involved.  Random vs. Intelligence -  I would choose intelligence being the catalyst.  Of coarse, this is for those who do not believe in God, or that a Creator was involved, because Creator God could have used evolution as the process in creation.  God being in the equation is the only way I could possibly believe in evolution.  Another topic for another thread would be Intelligent Design, which I think should be taught in schools.

 

The other question I have that was never satisfactorily answered is where did the gases come from that started the Big Bang?  Professors never did agree, and some stated that Cosmology was "junk science," yet Cosmology is what they referred to when attempting to explain.  So I, and my questions, were dismissed, which never did settle well with me.  I want the answers and they could not fully deliver.

 

I can barely make any attempt to discuss this topic as I am completely ignorant to these issues.  The more I try to share, the more my ignorance will show.  So, if I drop out of the conversation, it will only be because you have all gone way over my small head.   :help:  Still, I am glad to read and learn.

 

Looking forward to learning more and I will gladly follow this topic.  I apologize for deviating from the original OP, but these things were on my mind and I decided to leave them here and you can do with them what you choose.  At this time in my early stages of being an active reader and contributor to the forums, I have a lot of difficulty finding some of the topics that I have read, but I have opted to follow these topics so that in the future I may find them more easily.

 

Peace to you all!

 

In His Service,

PrairWarur

I actually think there is a lot of evidence of evolution, and there are other ways to radiometrically date things aside from using isotopes of carbon. However, I'd rather not get into that stuff here though. My intention here is to explore the possibility of Genesis 1 being about the creation of the earth specifically, whether or not that is a viable reading.



#20
OldSchool2

OldSchool2

    Senior Member

  • Worthy Writers
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,019 posts

 

 

 

Does the Genesis creation account talk about the creation of the entire universe or only the earth?  ...

 

Then are we talking about a relatively young Earth?

 

Could be. As Shiloh pointed out if we take the creation account in Genesis to be talking about the creation of the earth, the universe could be old and the earth young.

 

 

Well, there already are two creation stories, however ... 

 

A reading of Genesis reveals two distinctly different creation stories: the first spans Genesis 1:1-2:3 and the second continues from Genesis 2:4 to the end of the third chapter. These two accounts of creation include:

  • A cosmocentric account of how God created the heavens and earth out of the void
  • An anthropocentric account of how humanity came to populate the earth

http://www.deliriums...nesis-creation/






Worthy Christian Forums - Christian Message Boards - 1999-2014 part of the Worthy Network